Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40176726›Full record

Trial reportJournal of sleep research2025

Automated Sleep Staging in Epilepsy Using Deep Learning on Standard Electroencephalogram and Wearable Data.

Jaiver Macea, Elisabeth R M Heremans, Renee Proost, Maarten De Vos, Wim Van Paesschen

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of sleep research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04284072 (A Multicenter Study to Examine Clinical Scenarios for Long-term Monitoring of Epileptic Seizures With a Wearable Biopotential Technology), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04284072 nacompletednot on this map

A Multicenter Study to Examine Clinical Scenarios for Long-term Monitoring of Epileptic Seizures With a Wearable Biopotential Technology

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversitaire Ziekenhuizen KU LeuvenRan2020 to 2022Enrolled496ConditionsEpilepsyArmsSensor Dot
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jaiver MaceaLaboratory for Epilepsy Research, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-7645-897X
Elisabeth R M HeremansDepartment of Electrical Engineering (ESAT), STADIUS Center for Dynamical Systems, Signal Processing and Data Analytics, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-6860-2356
Renee ProostUnit of Locomotor and Neurological Disorders, Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4645-6877
Maarten De VosDepartment of Electrical Engineering (ESAT), STADIUS Center for Dynamical Systems, Signal Processing and Data Analytics, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-3482-5145
Wim Van PaesschenLaboratory for Epilepsy Research, Department of Neurosciences, Leuven Brain Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-8535-1699

Funding

Agentschap Innoveren en Ondernemen A19/TT/1549Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds KU Leuven (BOF) C24/18/097EIT Health 21263Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 1SC2921N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Automated sleep staging on wearable data could improve our understanding and management of epilepsy. This study evaluated sleep scoring by a deep learning model on 223 night-sleep recordings from 50 patients measured in the hospital with an electroencephalogram (EEG) and a wearable device. The model scored the sleep stage of every 30-s epoch on the EEG and wearable data, and we compared the output with a clinical expert on 20 nights, each for a different patient. The Bland-Altman analysis examined differences in the automated staging in both modalities, and using mixed-effect models, we explored sleep differences between patients with and without seizures. Overall, we found moderate accuracy and Cohen's kappa on the model scoring of standard EEG (0.73 and 0.59) and the wearable (0.61 and 0.43) versus the clinical expert. F1 scores also varied between patients and the modalities. The sensitivity varied by sleep stage and was very low for stage N1. Moreover, sleep staging on the wearable data underestimated the duration of most sleep macrostructure parameters except N2. On the other hand, patients with seizures during the hospital admission slept more each night (6.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.86-7.87) compared with patients without seizures (5.68, 95% CI 5.24-6.13), p = 0.001, but also spent more time in stage N2. In conclusion, wearable EEG and accelerometry could monitor sleep in patients with epilepsy, and our approach can help automate the analysis. However, further steps are essential to improve the model performance before clinical implementation. Trial Registration: The SeizeIT2 trial was registered in clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04284072.

Indexed as

Deep LearningElectroencephalographyEpilepsySleep StagesWearable Electronic DevicesAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPolysomnographyYoung Adultaccelerometryfocal seizuresmachine learningwearable electroencephalographywearable electronic devices

Identifiers

PMID40176726
PMCPMC12426735

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.